With all of these great influences, how is it that a formerly great series turned so terribly wrong? Well, this is where I think they went wrong. The original writers of the first two movies were obviously nowhere to be found in this attack on recent flicks. Instead, this movie was passed on to Pat Proft, writer of Police Academy, Hot Shots, and Naked Gun, and David Zucker, writer and director of the Airplane and naked gun Movies. Granted, all of these movies are extremely funny, but they were made for a different generation.
Authors often times include a character(s) in their novel who they have alienated from the society that they have created for their narrative. These characters could be anyone from the foil character(s) to the protagonist him/herself. Authors incorporate these characters as they give substance and genuineness to their work. In the novel, The Kite Runner by Khaled Hosseini and The Count of Monte Cristo by Alexandre Dumas, such characters are presented in similar but different ways. These differences are crucial however, because they are what make each novel unique.
Tim Burton’s Batman received a wide variety of reviews from critics and fans, alike. The majority of viewers enjoyed Burton’s take on the classic tale, while others did not appreciate the slight modifications on the original plot. A major difference Burton incorporated in the film was the overall dark tone, contrasting previous superhero movies. Unfortunately, this decision also brought Burton a lot of criticism; while many fans welcomed his new ideas, some did not like seeing Batman, a comic book hero, as the obscure man in a costume. Nevertheless, the film attracted millions of viewers because everyone was eager to see their childhood superhero in a movie that would surely become a blockbuster.
It's almost like you wouldn't know that the person who directed this is also responsible for the multiple award winning war movie, The Hurt Locker (2008). As the young Caleb, Adrian Pasdar works extremely well and one can be left wondering that he never really truly got the credit he deserved as an actor; even with his success in the television show Heroes (2006) prior to its cancellation, an individual may ponder why he did not suddenly become incredibly famous after his work in Near Dark. There is absolutely nothing at all wrong with this film. The way Bigelow directed flows perfectly with the characters and the writing. There is also at least an inkling of this film's infl... ... middle of paper ... ....
In most cases, the relationship was strikingly similar, however this essay will explore the manners in which the book differed from the movie. Due to time constraints and editing concerns, movies made from books and novels are forced to take out details and will contrast sharply with the feel of the book. In fact, it is very difficult for the vision of a director to parallel the vision of the author of any book, and so rarely will we find the same feelings and emotions evoked from watching a movie after having read the book. The phrase ‘the book is always better than the movie’ is a common layperson expression of how movies can change the effects of a story found in a book, and it is impossible to change this. The primary reason for this is that movies are forced into brevity, and with a few exceptions such as Gone With the Wind, it is very difficult to encapsulate details, vivid depictions and descriptions, and imagery that can be found in a book to the big screen.
Twentieth Century Literature 20.4 (1974): 291-97. JSTOR. Web. 30 Jan. 2010. Waldron, Randall H. "The Naked, the Dead, and the Machine: A New Look at Norman Mailer's First Novel."
Filmmakers have legitimate reasons to make changes, and are often undeserving of the bashings they receive from disgruntled book fans that were disappointed not to see a mirror of their favorite story on screen. Movie creators are artists too, and that in addition to fundamental restraints result in the differences one sees when a story emerges onto the big screen. One of the most prevalent complaints from readers is that movie adaptations omit content. This happens largely because frankly a film cannot fit the amount of details that are usually afforded to books. On goodreads.com one can find comment after commen... ... middle of paper ... ...d Jay.
Both plots contain elements that shock and amaze the reader by introducing them to ideas not normally seen in most novels. The dark nature in both stories can be startling, but are the central components and are used to make for a more interesting and intriguing story for the reader. Though a horror story is more common in this day and age, a story to the effect of Frankenstein was unheard of in 1818 when the book was written. Both novels have a powerful effect on the mind and imagination of the reader. In Frankenstein before the creation Shelley says, "Who shall conceive the horrors of my secret toil as I dabbled among the unhallowed damps of the grave or tortured the living animal to animate the lifeless clay?"(p.